Symbolizing a point feature as "heat map" does not consume credits as it merely changes the visualization of the data using rather simple visual analysis. What I mean by this is there is no statistical formula dictating the range of values being considered for "hot" or "cold" areas. Performing the Hot Spot Analysis will consume credits; however, as it runs a statistical analysis on the backend that determines these values.

A lot of people use the terms interchangeably, but a "heat map" and a "hot spot map" are two different things.

Symbolizing a point feature as "heat map" does not consume credits as it merely changes the visualization of the data using rather simple visual analysis. What I mean by this is there is no statistical formula dictating the range of values being considered for "hot" or "cold" areas. Performing the Hot Spot Analysis will consume credits; however, as it runs a statistical analysis on the backend that determines these values.

A lot of people use the terms interchangeably, but a "heat map" and a "hot spot map" are two different things.

Thanks Matt, that clears it up. I’m familiar with the difference between the Getis-Ord Gi* analysis and simple point densities, but my concern was if whatever point density process AGO employs to construct the “heat map” option would consume credits. The credits page only specifies “Spatial Analysis” under analytics so I was concerned said density process was counted as such.